Advertisement

Advertisement

Miners strike green gold

By Kurt Kleiner

Washington DC

A MINING company that planned to dig for gold just outside Yellowstone
National Park was bought off last week by President Bill Clinton.
Environmentalists had argued that the mine would pollute the waters of the Clark
Fork tributary of the Yellowstone River, which runs through the US’s favourite
national park.

The mine would have operated in Montana, just across the Wyoming border and
just outside the park. Under the agreement reached last week, the mining
company, Mountain Gold of Houston, will give back to the government the land on
which it planned to dig the Crown Butte New World Mine. In exchange, it will
receive as yet unnamed federal land worth &dollar;65 million. The company must
also spend &dollar;22 million to clean up damage from old mine workings it
inherited at the site.

The company bought the land from the federal government under an 1872 law
that allows miners to stake claims and buy federally owned land for &dollar;5 an
acre. The law was passed in the days when vast stretches of the American West
were owned by the government. To encourage settlement and development of
resources, the government gave away land or sold it cheaply to anyone who made a
legitimate claim. Farmers can no longer buy land from the government, but
certain lands, such as national forests, are still eligible for mining
claims.

Advertisement

“We’re thrilled. We’re pleased that the President took the leadership role on
this and closed the mine once and for all,” says Beth Norcross of American
Rivers, a lobby group in Washington DC.

Norcross and other environmentalists worried that water leaching through the
“tailings”, leftover rock from the mining operations, would pollute nearby
streams. Much of the rock would have a high sulphur content, and when exposed to
air and water would turn into sulphuric acid.

To solve the problem, the company had planned to dispose of its tailings in a
giant plastic-lined reservoir behind a dam. But the area is prone to
earthquakes, and critics feared that the dam could collapse. Les Van Dyke, who
represents Mountain Gold, insists the mine would have been safe. Opposition to
the mine was not based on sound science, he says.

In fact, if the company and the government cannot agree on the alternative
block of land, the company will apply for permits to begin operating the mine,
says Van Dyke. He is confident the company can show it will do no damage to the
environment.

Geoff Smith of the Clark Fork Coalition, a local green group based in
Missoula, Montana, says he has mixed feelings about the deal. On the one hand,
it seems wrong that the company is being paid to stop it from harming the
environment—which is illegal. On the other hand, he says, the government
might have been unable to stop the mine because the 1872 law gives precedence to
mining interests. “The real problem is the 1872 mining law… That law puts
taxpayers in the position of having to pay off mining companies,” he says.

Environmentalists and others have attacked the law for years. They have
attempted many times to amend the law so that the government could turn down
claims more easily, and so that mining companies would have to pay a realistic
price for federal land and also pay royalties on the minerals they extract. But
attempts to significantly change the law have failed.

The Yellowstone mine charade is being played out against growing anti-mining
sentiment. Traditionally, mines have been a vital part of Montana’s economy,
says Smith. But tourism and recreational jobs are growing more important, and
these are threatened by mine pollution.